6-9
COMPARATIVE COSTS OF SERVING COFFEE AND MILK
IN SELECTED OREGON RESTAURANTS
bY"
Jerry Colburn
and
S. Kent Christensen
Miscellaneous Paper 59
July 3958
Agricultural Experiment Station
Oregon State College
Corvallis
TAME OF CONTENTS
Page
Summary
1
Introduction 2
Purpose of Study General Procedures Selection of Restaurants Collection of Data Methods of Allocating Joint Costs 2
2
3
3
. •
Comparative Costs of Serving Coffee and Milk . ... ' .....
Summary of Costs for Serving Coffee and Milk. . . Element Costs in Serving Coffee and Milk Product Costs Labor Costs. ..
. . Equipment Costs Serving Equipment Costs • . • . • Miscellaneous Supply Costs Analysis of Physical Inputs. . . . Products Used Coffee Cream. 0 Sugar Water and Ice Milk • Labor Allocating Joint Costs . Washing and Bussing Dishes Equipment . . • Depreciation and Maintenance . Water, Gas, and Electricity. . Serving Equipment Supplies 2
.
4
5
. 7
7
9
11
11
• • • • •
15
15
15
15
15
15
17
17
19
19
21
21
23
23
23
COMPARATIVE COSTS OF SERVING COFFEE AND MILK
IN SELECTED OREGON RESTAURANTS
Jerry Colburn mad S. Kent Christensen*
Summary
The purpose of this study was to measure the costs of serving coffee and
milk in selected Oregon restaurants and to determine how much, if any, additional charge for milk could be justified on a cost basis. The information
needed to compare the costs of serving these beverages was obtained from an
intensive study of four western Oregon restaurants. These restaurants were
selected to represent a cross section of the restaurant industry in this area.
Costs associated with milk were found to exceed those for coffee by a
maximum of 1.25 cents per guest served. In two of the restaurants this cost
spread was 0.68 and 1.12 cents respectively. In the remaining restaurant it
was found that milk could be served for about one-half cent less than coffee.
Variations in these cost spreads were due mainly to the differences in the
size of the average milk serving, which ranged from 5.0 to 7.5 ounces.
Assuming these restaurants represent a cross section of the industry,
these costs indicate there is little justification for the current practice
in many restaurants of charging 5 to 15 cents extra for milk served to guests.
Cost information developed in this study does not reflect the total cost
of either beverage to the restaurant. No attempt was made to measure costs
associated -with overhead expenses such as rent or management salary. An
analysis designed to compare coffee and milk on a total-cost basis would tend
to equate the cost of the two beverages in those restaurants where coffee costs
were lower than those for milk.
The study revealed a potential solution for those attempting to eliminate
the pricing differential where it can be shown that some justification remains
on the basis of cost. This would be to equate the costs of the two beverages
by varying the size of the milk serving.
For example, in the restaurant which served a 7.5-ounce glass of milk,
the cost for coffee and milk could be equalized by reducing the size of the
average serving of milk to 6.5 ounces. The comparative cost per guest served
for the two beverages would then be 5.50 cents for coffee and 5.36 cents for
milk. Similarly, the restaurant which served 5.0 ounces of milk could increase its serving to approximately 6 ounces in equating the cost of preparing
and serving coffee and milk.
While altering the size of the milk serving would effectively equate
the total costs of the two beverages, further study is needed to, determine
the range within which size of serving could be adjusted, and also whether
such action would actually affect consumption of fluid milk in restaurants.
Former Graduate Research Assistant and. Associate Professor, respectively.
-2INTRODUCTION
Restaurant operators throughout the nation commonly charge 5 to 15 cents
more for milk than for competing beverages such as coffee when served with
dinners. In some instances this differential has been extended to include
ala carte orders as well. Opposition to this practice by interested individuals and groups has grown as the dairy industry has intensified its
search for ways of expanding fluid milk markets.
Opponents of this practice contend that it cannot be justified on a cost
basis. This group generally believes that elimination of the price differential would expand significantly consumption of milk as a beverage in
restaurants. Some restaurant operators accept this viewpoint and offer milk
to their customers at the same price as coffee and other competing beverages.
The majority of the restaurant operators attempt to justify the extra
charge for milk by pointing to the higher product cost for this beverage.
Furthermore, it is often believed that the demand for milk is relatively
stable and would not increase appreciably if the differential were removed.
PURPOSE OF STUDY
It was the purpose of this study to measure the various costs of preparing and serving coffee and milk in selected Oregon restaurants, No attempt
was made to develop the total or absolute costs of preparing and serving the
two beverages. Only those costs which were considered to vary between coffee
and milk were measured. Such costs as building repairs and depreciation,
manager's salary, etc., were not considered in the analysis.
The restaurants included in this study were selected to represent a
cross section of those found in the region. The costs determined for these
restaurants were developed as a basis for evaluating the general pricing
policy currently in existence for coffee and milk. More specifically, the
study was undertaken to determine how much, if any, additional charge for
milk normally could be justified on a cost basis.
GENERAL PROCEDURES
Selection of Restaurants
In the early stages of the project development, it was anticipated that
a survey-type study would be most effective because of the wider application
possible from data collected from a large number of restaurants operating
under a variety of conditions. However, none of the restaurant operators
were able to provide the detailed cost data needed for this type of study.
Thus it was necessary to make an intensive investigation of each restaurant
selected for study. This requirement limited the scope of the study to a
small number of restaurants.
Based upon preliminary investigations, four restaurants representative of
the industry were selected for intensive study. Detailed data on the size and
nature of the restaurants are contained in the appendix. The"restaurax ts were
designated, from largest to smalleet, as A, B, Cs and D.
Collection of Data
The basic data included in this study were collected over a three-day
period in the middle of the week during the months of June and July, 1957.
Prices or values applied to physical inputs in arriving at dollar costs
were obtained from the restaurant records at this time. Other data collected
included the amounts of products used; labor, power, fuel, and water requirements; kinds and value of equipment used; kinds and numbers of dishes and
silverware used; number of guests served; and other related information.
Methods of Allocating Joint Costs
A number of tasks in the operation of a restaurant are indirectly related to every food and beverage item served to guests. These tasks may be
considered as joint services essential to the successful merchandising of
the items appearing on the menu. The costs incurred in providing these
services must be covered by the receipts obtained from the sale of the
various items. In determining the costs of preparing and serving coffee and
milk, the problem became one of allocating to each beverage an equitable
portion of the joint costs involved. Two basic methods of allocating these
joint costs were employed in this study: (1) the number of physical units
handled, and (2) the relative value of the beverage in the average guest
check.
In situations where the cost of providing the service was directly related to the number of physical units handled, allocations were made on this
basis. This was the situation in allocating the equipment and labor costs
for washing and bussing dishes. Since the cost of this operation is largely
determined by the total number of dishes washed, the portion of the total
cost allocated to each beverage was determined by the number of pieces that
each contributed to the total.
The second method of allocating joint costs was followed when the costs
to be allocated could not be determined by physical counts, as in the dishwashing operation. Taking guest orders and preparing checks is an example
of this type of joint cost. No direct charge is made for this service, so
the cost must be covered by the cash receipts from the sale of items ordered.
If the guest orders a cup of coffee or a glass of milk, the cost of taking
the order and preparing the check must be covered by the beverage served. If
the guest has a complete dinner with beverage, the cost should be distributed
among all items purchased. Joint costs of this nature were allocated to each
beverage according to its relative value in the average guest check of those
guests including the respective beverage in their orders. Costs allocated
in this manner included: serving water, cleaning up, taking orders and
preparing checks, and idle time.
In addition to the two major allocations discussed above, it was found
necessary to make several other allocations or allowances. In instances where
two items such as tea and coffee were served in the same china, it was necessary
-4to charge a portion of the breakage costs to each beverage. It also was
necessary to allocate a portion of certain products such as cream and sugar
to the various uses other than coffee.
In order to present the costs for the various elements on a per-guest
basis, the employees , consumption of coffee and milk and a commensurate
share of labor, depreciation, etc., were removed from each element before
the unit costs of serving guests were computed.
COMPARATIVE COSTS OF SERVING COFFEE AND MILK
After the various physical inputs involved in preparing and serving
coffee and milk were collected and allocated to the respective beverages,
current prices were applied to them to determine the total cost of each
element or input.L1 Prices obtained from the restaurants (Table 1) were
adjusted to remove the effect of all reported discounts on coffee and milk
and rental charges on coffee equipment. Rental charges for the milkdispensing equipment could not be accurately ascertained and are therefore
included in the reported product cost for milk.
Table 1. Price and Wage Rates Used in Determining the Costs of
Serving Coffee and Milk, Four Oregon Restaurants,
Three-Day Period, June-July, 1957
Item
Products:
Coffee
Cream
Sugar
ice
Milk
Labor:
Waitress
Kitchen
Utilities:
Water
Gas
Electricity
Supplies:
Washing compound
Disinfectant
Napkins
Price or wage for restaurant
C
B
Unit
$
lb.
qt.
lb.
lb.
gal.
hr.
hr.
100 cu, ft,
therm
kwh
lb.
lb.
100
$
$
$
0.89
0.86
.45
.45
0.835
.465
0.85
.45
.098
.098
.099
.012
.012
.012
.102
.012
.88
.884
.85
.854
.90
1.00
.145
.146
,414
.165
.099
.90
1,00
1.10
1.00
.145
.151
,014
.221
.209
.017
.165
.09
.225
.18
.25
.10
1.00
1.00
.192
,245
.020
.19
.10
The procedures for collecting and allocating physical input information and
the data collected are reported in detail in the next chapter,
-5-
The total costs developed for each element were divided by the number
of guests served to determine unit costs. In the case of coffee, the unit
cost per cup of coffee brewed also was determined, and is included in all
tables to show the effect of coffee refills on costs.L1
Summary of Costs for Servin Coffee and Milk
A summary of the various costs associated with preparing and serving
coffee and milk is shown in Table 2. It will os noted that the total costs
developed for serving coffee varied considerably between restaurants. This
also is true of the costs developed for serving milk. The variation in costs
was influenced largely by the product and labor costs. For coffee, the
variation in product cost largely was due to differences in the rate of cream
consumption and secondly, to differences in the percentage of coffee which was
served as refills. It will be noted that the cost for refill coffee both from
the standpoint of product and labor cost is important. Differences in labor
costs for coffee also were influenced rather importantly by differences in the
costs of washing and bussing dishes.
The variation in the total costs shown for milk results mainly from the
variation in the size of the milk serving, which ranged from 5 to 7.5 ounces,
The product costs of milk account for about 75% of the costs of serving the
beverage. In restaurant C, product costs of milk actually exceeded the total
costs related to coffee. When the product cost of milk is excluded, the
remaining costs are remarkably uniform among the various restaurants. Differences among these other costs reflect the unique characteristics of the
particular operation and tend to cancel out when added together.
The costs associated with milk exceeded those for coffee by a maximum
of 1.25 cents per guest served in restaurant C. Milk costs in restaurants B
and D were found to exceed the comparable costs for coffee by .68 and 1.12
cents respectively for each guest served. In restaurant A it was found that
coffee costs per guest served exceeded those for milk by .49 cent.
The cost figures shown in this table do not reflect the total costs of
either beverage to the restaurant. No attempt was made to measure the costs
associated with overhead expenses such as rent or management t s salary. An
analysis designed to compare coffee and milk costs on a total-cost basis
would tend to further equate the costs of the two beverages in those restaurants
where coffee costs were lower than those for milk. This would be true because
of the allocation procedure wherein a larger portion of the overhead costs
would be allocated to coffee because of its greater importance in the guest
check.
Another factor which has not been taken into consideration in this
a Three of the four restaurants included in this study had a stated policy of
charging guests for coffee refills on ala carte orders. This practice generally
is accepted throughout the restaurant industry. However, the analysis of the
guest checks showed that this policy was not enforced more than 5% of the time
in any of the restaurants. All of the restaurants provided guests with free
coffee refills served with dinners.
co 0 co NM)• C4-0
4 MN 0
• • •
r-I
-11}
Cr)
c-
CO
0
rel
•
C11
01
(IN
CV
0• 0 •1 ON•
•
•
r"3
(-4
cti
-I-)
cn 0
cv 0
.--I V) 0)
C4
viN
4-)
g
a A
14
CO
4.)
ti)
0)
I'Z
O
I
t0
0 v) .0
r-I 4-) co
O
0)
)4 (04)
00
0)
4.)
()
V)
0) 0
'0
0)
ON
c.- s.0
.-,
CV C
ii)*
• .
(ee
4-4
-1 L' -• 4 -1 4-1
l
• • •
'0"
*A.
•0
0'1
0 r 4 0 0 11\
4
• •
......: •-i
VI•
-.1'
4-1
tr)
041
044
+
-44*
at
ON S- --.1- r-i 1"1 nO
e•-- C11 4-1 0 CO.
. • • • •
4-4 V) 0
vis
CA
r-- r--
CO ON CV M0
• • • • •
.4-1 e-1
a. 00- V)
1.4
0
FA
3
O
C.1.
4.)
erl C--
trvt_r‘
• • •cv• 0 •0 tt\•
in
Mr4
R.
0)
$.4
0) L) In4
CZ
$4 V a)
ra) 0 )4
far
A
c--
0) V\
`40
•-.1 4--1
Crl
+..9-
44
0
•
.--1
0
0 ch
4-4 "")
O
4-1 r-t
tH
$.4
0 0
co 0 et)
tn.. 0) (/)
Cn J l'*-4 *4 (`-- CO
CO
N C) () 0 ral•
• • • • •
.....1 r-t
.(4
tr‘
43,
-LI"
%,0
•
+
4,4 4,4
t-,
cu al
►-)
fl)
c1)
0 CL.
>-,
• a)
.4-1 {Z2
> I
I-I (1)
a) 4)
ti) I.4
.0
4-1 (-4
O
co
A-)
0
0
0
(1-4
O
0 \ 01-0" C"-- 1 0
( \0 r4 IIN•
r-I• C•n•• Y
• • •
V) >
$.1 1%) I-4
9
g "1
4)
4
a) 0
Id
0-4 4-) 0)
*1.4 I
• (A
0
0
r-1
'0
0'.
IA o. t,- ..o N in
C-., MN 0 r.4
• • • • • •
v) 4.)
;.4 r)
0)
1.4
.0
CI-
0 -4 N
.....1
Vi.
69.
-
0
0„Inn..40 oo
ce) IV
r".4 .4.) 01
el-0 MNco t
S-1 if?)
(vv..)
. •
v444 Cs.)
4443.
Pi U2
V)
• •
•
,i-1 Crl 0 (V 01 a.
Nr-4 e-4 0 0. -3
0
•
•
•
0‘•
fn I-4
-.t.
-
-n1.
.:4
-(4
../.9
I S-1
at cg
4-)
0
(/)
0) 0 TS
4-4 U) 0
0.
C.4 V (1)
M 0"
4 tcsq
1•r.•
• • •
ct.) o I-1
A
13-.
-,
479.
44.
0)
0
N
,
CV"
.
--.1
lz,4.
+-)
4.)
4-1.4)0
4)
.ri
4) •4.1
si
4-1
LH
a
o
‘44
1.4
O
44 (r)
4>
ti-i
0
C.)
4) 0)
0
(1) r44
0) 01 0) CO
E 0 ••4 4.,
ii) (.. )
4.) 0 S•4 0..14
0
E-,
O '0 0 .44
'4) E
(1)
E. 4)
(/)
4)
0
Ili
41.4
0
S.4
0
t4-I
rn
er
4.) 0)
0
...4
-g
ce)
r-4
g e...4
0 1.1
v, +e,
0
S.1M .,I i
4.)
g ..a 0 ...., t R E-,
4)
O El gi4) v
4) a,...4 41 V) V)
r-1
r4
44
-7.
study is the influence of seasonality of sales upon the costs of the two
beverages. In most restaurants the summer decline in coffee sales varies
from 5% to 20%. This seasonal variation greatly affects the costs associated
with coffee sales. During the three-day study in July it was found in restaurant A, for example, that 952, or approximately 36% of the guests, ordered
fountain-type beverages. The bulk of these orders were on an ale carte basis
with relatively small values. The management in this restaurant estimated
from past experience that nearly all of this trade would shift to coffee in
colder months. The effect of such a trend would be to materially reduce the
value of the average order containing coffee. This in turn would result in
coffee being charged a larger percentage of the joint costs of serving guests
and would increase costs of serving coffee on a per-guest basis.
Similarly, an increase in the number of dinner guests ordering coffee
tends to increase the cost of serving this beverage because of the greater
percentage of coffee refills associated with dinner sales. Further study is
needed to determine the relative importance of these seasonal fluctuations in
coffee sales,
The study revealed a potential solution for eliminating price differential where it can be shown that some justification remains on the basis of
cost. This would be to equate the costs of the two beverages by varying the
siy/e of the milk serving.
For example, in restaurant B the average serving of milk was found to be
7.5 ounces with a corresponding cost per serving of L.83 cents. The costs in
this instance could be equalized by reducing the size of the average serving
by approximately one ounce. This would result in a serving of 6.5 ounces,
with a product cost of 4,01 cents. The comparative costs for the two beverages
would then be 5.50 cents for coffee and 5.36 cents for milk. Similarly, the
size of the milk serving in restaurant A could be increased from 5 to approximately 6 ounces in equating the cost of preparing and serving coffee and milk.
While altering the size of the milk serving would effectively equate the
total costs of the two beverages, further study is needed to determine the
range within which the size of serving could be adjusted, and also whether
such action would actually increase the consumption of fluid milk in restaurants.
Element Costs in Servin Coffee and Milk
Product Costs
The unit product costs for coffee and milk are shown in Table 3. The
variation among the restaurants of the unit product costs shown in the lefthand column for coffee was due to such factors as the number of cups obtained
from a round of coffee, the rate of consumption of items such as cream and
sugar, and the prices paid for the various physical products. Costs shown for
water and ice were affected by the relative importance of the beverage in the
average guest check.
Unit product costs shown for coffee on a per-guest served basis for each
restaurant include the variations discussed above, as well as the added costs
cn
cd
4)
to
N
0
0
Sr
Sr
0
al
C.)
•-4 co 0)
g• 3
Si 0 e)
Si
CO
4)
(I)
r-0 In
0 ON
.ort
a.
0
4-)
•-1
0) 0
v) V
4)
Cri
Si 6) Si
06
7
0) 0)
4.)
tr)
a,
(1-4
di
4)
0
V
0
,--, (t) 03
t)4
.-1
0
(..)•
S-4 $.4
0 4
--1
a
O
4.
0 I - -,
0\ CM If \
r•-
cr-, crN. ..-73.
,2,
t**- ON in I en
1.(1 .cm
0• 0 oN
•
) 0)
+a
C\I 0
•
•
cf)
v-4
O
e-I
44)*
•
r1
to
U)
r•
cen r-• 0•
c 't CM
—I'
•
\C)
•
r+-1
+,0
.64
4)
U
0
C.)
Sy
0
(4-1
to 0)
-6)E Si Si
(MI co di 0)
0) 4-I 0 0) 4.)
cd
0 $4
o
u cf)
ELI
6)
U
0
••4
Sa
o
4-1
al
4.)
0
g
to
g
77:1,
•-4
4-)
0)
.•-1
-9.,
of coffee refills. The importance of refill servings also varied among the four
restaurants, The highest percentage of refills was found in restaurant B,
where almost 37% of the coffee servings were of this nature. Refills in restaurants A, C, and D accounted for 30%, 18%, and 13% of the total number of servings respectively.
Milk product costs were found to be considerably higher than were the
product costs of coffee. In the four restaurants studied the cost of milk
alone accounted for 72% to 78% of the total cost developed for the beverage.
The extreme variation in milk product costs among the restaurants was due
almost entirely to differences in the size of the average serving. The
average serving size-ranged from 5.0 ounces -in restaurant A to 7.5 ounces in
restaurant B. The average serving in restaurants C and D was 6.5 and 6.0 ounces.
Labor Costs
The labor costs per unit of coffee and milk are shown in Table 1. The
various labor costs related to coffee are shown to be consistently higher than
the comparable costs shown for milk. The costs of those tasks directly related
to coffee are somewhat higher than the comparable costs for milk because of
the additional costs associated with coffee refills.
The costs shown for the indirect or joint tasks associated with coffee
also are higher than the comparable costs for milk because of the methods
employed in allocating these indirect costs. That is, coffee represented a
larger portion of the average guest check than did milk. Therefore, the, cost
of each element allocated by this method was proportionally higher for coffee.
In a similar manner, the labor costs allocated upon the basis of the number of
dishes washed also were higher for coffee than milk because each serving of
coffee contributes a proportionally greater share of dishes mashed,
The most important element of labor cost, and the most variable as well,
was the cost of washing and bussing dishes. The marked variation among the
restaurants was due to the unique characteristics of the various operations.
In restaurants A and B this operation was performed by a minimum of two
employees throughout the day. During part of the time these employees were
either idle or working at a slow rate. In this instance an over-all increase
in the volume of business would serve to reduce the unit costs for both
beverages. However, a greater volume of business mould not necessarily change
the current ratio of costs existing between coffee and milk. Thus, from the
standpoint of relative costs, the increased volume would not be particularly
important.
In restaurant C the washing operation was performed by only one employee
per shift. In this case the dish washer devoted a considerable portion of her
time to other unrelated tasks which were not included in the washing time.
Dish washing was performed for relatively short periods at an accelerated rate.
Similarly, in restaurant D the washing operation was performed at irregular
intervals and at a rapid rate. In both these restaurants there was very little
idle time or low levels of activity in the dish-washing operations. In
addition, the entire bussing of used dishes was performed by the waitresses in
both restaurants. Since the total distances traveled often did not exceed the
distances to bussing stations in the larger restaurants, a somewhat greater
efficiency resulted in this operation.
H
O
c+
p)
1-4
co
co
tr,
't
ht
r0
'0
q
co
0
c+
••
0
0
.....
1-6
r+
0
0.
0
I•43
+4)
(0
(0
).-3
u)
(0
40
(0
co
•
0
0
A'
•
H
8
H
:31
H
H
CO
0 co
1...
.... z
Z
sv 1-3 .--1 cn o a o cn .-1 co
0 V).-'' 11 CO
--. 1-1 1---3 (A C) O.
co 0
et*
(‘)
gl)
ID fm P CO I--, 1-,.• c+ CO CO
0) 0. M (0 H I-4
CA H X
CO 11
0 t"4-
''' 0 0th 1 .4 X il (0 fl
a. co <, < 0) co a.,. < et- 0
(0 CO < 10 (0 (0 < 1-.n• 0- (ri
. n r-, 1-s 1....
1-4)I..•• M ( o'S 1..“
f,-y
Q° 0- 0 0 I r+
CO
Co & 0 0 I c+
fift)
0
1..3
9
•A• ,1 (0 0
0. CO
11 tO 0
I'm
1....
0. ti
b'
0
11
et)
1-4
a,
'1
0
CO c;) 4
►1 0 0
11
0' 0 CO •
cn
.-1 a
co .
0
fl) u)
(0 0 14)
0
n I-•
0
<-**
n H) 1-$)
Q' 0-
14'
`-'
Q.. co
a
r, A....
1-...
c4. 1-+, co
H,
co
a
Woo
Co CO
t-f)
A''
11
ti ,1
e-n•
(J)
H
(0
(0
(0
.•
1
CO
►
co o
0 /1
co
0
r+ 0
(11 CA
r+
d
....
r+
t•-•
A)
Ei•
0
cQ
0
fir
-6A-
N H
(-to
H .1-... *1.-„, F-+ *cC 'f.-.
00 0.3 iND La -3 ON
;-. W b
H
.P"."--3
'Id
er
ig
'1
N
2 n
4 'el0
CO
fil 1.--,0
Ca
(0
0
CA
ft'
(a
rt•
P al
0
rs
-EA-
1-•
.--• b C.- b b
OW
(J)
\co co -.4 L 03
rN) ON
N I-,
-1. W n-• ;..J h 1....
.0-- . co .-- VI CO CO
.64
1.) I._,
•
H
H -L-'C
0
lAJ 0 0:1
_&.÷
0 _ • a •
,
• • •
1->
0\ -.I l'n3
N.1000t- 1--. k....)
•.0 .r--- %No 03k..) 0
(r) (.0 *V
(0 0 ('n)
1.1 (0 1-.1
<
i H)
(0(+ t..4
P• to
-6.0-
N H
Z.,-Cbb
o
.c.
O U.) (:)*. OD n...) 'NO
.0..--
H
0
6)-
nft ;-. i..-. b ;-.
:-.3
L., \xi 1 - 6 C) .p.-- N.)
.i.).---
0 0. V-E.
1-..
•
• • • • •
•
-....1 0 .-. 0 1--.;.---• L.) 0
-NJ ice- cr.------,,) n....) \Ft ‘40 •0
fu CO
(.4 (‘)
0
c0:1 E
..i
,...
tt
" 0 (s)
M
4 V
Pi O
a .
(0 V,H
On 0
111
1-1
E..13
0
W
VI
1--1)
n--.3 0
ti
ii
(0 CI
(0 0
(.0 ..T7
co c co
m ,i
CA
(5) r+ H
a. cn 0
o
.. i,..4
0
tn
&
,5s
fl)
'ID
"
il 0 6)
6) 0 el
''0
01 F-+
a
a 0 co
M.
C.-•
6
g)
T
L.
CO
0 a
I-4
(< et•• o
z.-c.) s)
Vt (0
--a (n
et"
(A
N.
"xi
o
c
co
Ps
ct
o Al
q'
(0
4-1
CA to -0co
coCm
o
co
.-3 co .1
< (A
.1
(0 ri. H
a,
P> 0
bI 0.
cdco
0
ii+
H
WC“-bI.
+t- H VI. 0
0---
1-0 0
4cf)
H
.0 00 h ;-...0 1-.
-.7
11, ON GNn 00
-&---
;.-..-- ;-,.
‘JI --.11.4 0
0
1-3
t-EA-
1--+
•
I
•
•
•
1,...... •;....
W ;..
1-4
t- N., o
--.3 Vi. 1-...p41-.
+fr
-3
Wb-.bb bW
t- -4 0 H .0 cu
H
-
•
•
•
1.4
0 L.)
-0T-
•
t'Y
1:i
11 0 CO
CO
1.0
f-.1
co Ø 1-.
a o
0
Equipment Costs
The unit equipment costs for coffee and milk are shown in Table 5. In
addition, the tables presented in Appendix B provide a complete breakdown of
depreciation, utility, and maintenance costs associated with each type of
equipment studied.
The total unit equipment costs relating to coffee were relatively uniform
among the restaurants studied. It should be emphasized that these costs would
not be expected to decline markedly should the volume of coffee sales increase.
This is because the fixed costs, such as depreciation and maintenance, are a
relatively small portion of the total equipment costs. The majority of these
costs, such as electricity and gas, would vary with changes in the level of
sales.
The total equipment costs for milk show more variation than those for
coffee. In particular, the costs for restaurant D were high in comparison
with the other restaurants. This was the only restaurant studied in which the
milk-dispensing equipment was owned by the operator. In this case the unit
depreciation costs were high due to the relatively low volume of business
during the study. This effect also was noted in connection with the dishwashing equipment costs in this restaurant. In this instance an increase in
the over-all volume of business would materially reduce the equipment costs
associated with milk, and to a lesser extent those related to coffee.
Serving Equipment
Unit serving equipment costs were found to vary considerably between
restaurants, but are not important costs in the over-all picture (Table 6).
Also, despite careful checking, the reported breakage rates for the restaurants studied remained exceptionally low. Various restaurant owners estimated
that, a more realistic breakage rate would be much higher than those reported.
Any increase in these rates would result in a greater increase in costs
relating to coffee because of the relatively high cost of replacing equipment
associated with the serving of this beverage.
Supplies Used
Total costs of supplies for both coffee and milk are quite uniform among
the restaurants studied with the exception of restaurant B (Table 7). In this
restaurant these costs are approximately double those shown for the other
restaurants. Most of this variation is due to the larger volume of washing
compound used in this restaurant. Restaurant b was the only establishment
studied in which the washing compound was automatically supplied to the dishwashing machine.
Restaurants B and C were the only establishments using a disinfectant
the dish-washing operations. Restaurant B employed this material
only when silverware was being washed. Thus the cost of this element applied
to coffee but not to milk. Restaurant C used a disinfectant throughout the
washing operation, so the cost was allocated to both beverages. In either
case the cost of this element was negligible.
material in
N.
•
0
•
•
44)
••
v)
4.)
CIS G]
4)
co
as
0
g k
Id
aA
P
o
os
0
o rn •-rj
.-I +) a)
ca >
t.4 a) c..4
0
0
o
n
v)
4)
cf)
as
6 is.cS
o•n
o ,-.4
4-)
..
-0
N r-I
> 0
:.4 '')
a) I
cf) a)
- S
a-t •-s
..-1
`..-. ..,,
-0
`-cl 0
g "$.4
0 as fa.,
as
4-I
4-I cd
o a)
c..) t
as
;K.0)
O f-4
c4-i 4
co
4.)
v)
O
(...)
4-)
Z
a)
P.,
.44
er
-(1)-
.(:nI st-c
7 '17 ''''.
1-1-‘ r•I
0 **,-- 0
•
1 ‘td
.,
1 ":
.69.
4A•
1 Cr)
0
cd (3
4-)
(t)
(9
cC
-1-)
0
0
90
r-i v) cs)
P.
‘,
a)
e.) o $.4
a..
,Q
.,....4 •-1 re't •-•41.--*---; 1 •=t nq ."•n•••••4
i ... NT,' cs..)
0
0 (i) "0
r4 4-)e)
V) >
S-• 0 $.•
a)
co
ta. os v)
.....1 r-I
1•O CY'N •-4 1•1 -4
ni '"*.11-1 0 %.•••40
erl
•
• •
•
•
-&.:).
.E4
ai
;,4
0
at 03
+i
v)
0
0,)0
'.
f4
•-1 G6 CV
P.,
$-1
a)
CI,
A
r•4
1,4
8 2•
0
0 vs -t$
.-4 4-) as
$.4 T) ..
F i
r
0) 0 63
CV .4 D-1 0) vs
4-)
ca
a)
1.4
0
0
-cs
r"4 v.) o)
i-,
w
4-10..
...4
A
0.)
69-
a) 0 a)
11.
C.L.
0 •••I It" CV 1-4 10•41
•-•4 ..".n ri4 C.)• N"Nkr.••11 CV
0) (..) i-i
..,
•
0
r4 •-4 0 0
04
k V 0)
4-)
vs
e.)
L4
•n10.1
•
("r•• •••1 1,4 1--) 0 "•••,, 0
.
•
1," InliCNI
C•••-•
0 ".•••40 0
wg.9.
C••••
t".4
.69.
-LNG
0 CY'l‘-'4 •-.1 1 •-4
H 04
•- 0 0 0
•
• • • • • *
.69.
•40 •...i
COGS
• • '
C\I ,--1 o., • ,--1 1'4 I
N•
•-100000
• • • • •••C‘i
44
40-)
4) c.) 1.4
•r-I
-0
o)
v)
0
4-)
to •
6) ,
60 ,-4
v∎
4-)
v)
o
Q in
+.)
•
0.)
0)
a)
A., ,--4
•...4 0)
£7 P-1
k
r-,,.. 0
V) pt,
w
0 a) 4) En 4.1
Cli
1.4
*44 4) 4-) u)
())
U
k 0) c.) v)
• -i
cti
E
4)
te
es E. ...........
Os P 0
0 .4 ,.i
;F.o o (9
0 .•-*o
0,
0 ••••
IV ai $4 t-I
f--n
col 4 ,--4 cf)
CH 40 I-4 E ',3 0 0
cis cd
+) 4-1vs co ori
VI 0 V) •ci
vs al v) as a) ctl cti
+)
00
0 O.) 0) $-) $.1
fn El' titi =its
0 ',4 ..4 0 0 0 0
(‘)1 C... Cs 0 0 ,...4 ,.4
T , s
0
0
•
Pi
(** •••4
4
4-)
0
Ei .4
g
" 6 4
0
"
r-i
as 'Po
41
.0
.-1
al
4-)
'4)
P-,
•.,-.1
0
E
as
V)
•..4
,tv,
E-I
r-i 1
-4
0.13.0
gr- o b1)
4g
cTf
h,.
ccS
3
cr)
al
a)
0
0
cg
•
0 1 0
tp
0
0
'0
H 0) (1)
$4 0 (1)
0) 0 $.4
o
0 CO V
0_
H
<18-5...qJ cc?) S.:I
0') 1;*
(1) $.4
a) 0 a)
S4
H -P
CI)
tr) 1".
f-4 CD k
0
a)
1:14 OD Ca
0• "•-n10• N st •
•
#10
1A CV H NN
0*0•0• \S`.,
t^-1
•
te.
-P
(/)
a)
IA CV CV CVCn11-../
o•
40
c.7
0
H
•
lfl
Cr.s.
CL) r–I
H H CV IN It—i
000\
•o
•
Cr) rl
•
• *
1–D
H I
•
a)
z9
rtd
0) 0
CH
4–I
a)
o (14
0
;-4• A
CH I
to II)
t))
O
0
0
H
'CI
N H H NtNir--1 Hto
a)
0
0)
C.4
0) 0 F...t
,0
o o• o•
•
A 5
g
0
0 0) '0
ri +3 co
m j",
F.4 (I) 5.4
o
• • , •
, 0:0
Crt (V N H <1Icrt r--I 1CM
07
•
14
CO 0_ CD
La-, MO cra
0• 00
00,
• •
• •
5
i If.
•
co
+3
El
01
P4
.ri
CV
1.4
ttO
9-1
ry
Q)
(1)
0
0
c)iz$
4)
fat
C.4 0 (l)
24
43
44 1-1
.0
H
k
a
•.
a)
-poa)
(1.41
0)
44
-P
0
04 0 0
.r-1 0)
tc1
(a 0)k
0
P.
0 0 •0
ri
0 4> 0 ri
(a +a -P cti
Cd 0 0 +3
54
4 to-1
0
0) H
ri) rA
,C) 4 H
N
MI
0) 1.4
(c0
Ca
;4 0 a)
a)
0
a) k
• 1-4+0)3 4-10 CO 04)00 0al $4
0 44 CO
> 0
0 6:)4 0 0 a) +3 44 40
0 (1)
;4 0
co
ta
a)
Crl CV H H CM IM H H
0 0 0 0 •n•.. 0 0 H
• • • *
• • •
-• 0t(10.,
(1)
o ta to;.{° to c7
t.) ta
C=5
4a)0)
a)
(f) C.)
••
0
0
CO CD
0 CO H
1.4 Ua M
crl
IA
0
0cel
0) ,r;
0 m 0 +3 4-4 al H 0
k
4->
a)
H d0E-1
(1) (AO
C.)
-P0 .. 0S4
0 Ct)
al 0
0) -I +2M 1.4
t.41 •ri kt#
'4 ,,Is:
H
(71
<1<11
0
0 0 'ti
H -P
0)
4)
F-4
4) F-4
a)
00
ci.,
w (0
44
GS
-*,
CP
tEit
0
0 ci) 'CS
H 4-)
0
tn P.
F-4
0
F-1
QO g 0
c"\CV 04 IA
00\I0
a 0 10
,0
a
0
40
Q
/.4
0
0.4 IOU Ca
N
0
al C.)
+)
U) 0
0
ST
W
a)
Cf1 H i--1 I,ci,-, 0 0
0
'CS
f---1 CO W
gli
Pk
o .n,
0
CU IS \
00\
C..7 ri
4-)0
10
,C)
a) ,c,
H
TS 0
0 1---
H -I-)
0
4) t>
S4 4) S.4
N
(1)
0.4 MU C13
4
40
1.11.1c110.1 r
Cr\
H M t-H 0 0 H
_..d:
••4
a) a a)
0 0
a 0
tili
0 0 0
0 *
•
0 0 F4
u) C--
H N ((N r,
0 ---.,10 CD
(Y\ <IC \ I 1.11
;..1 0 a)
•P
MH 104 1.I\
0 "•-...t0 0
• .
.
tR.
40
tep
0
0
'LS
HM0
4
0
o F.4
43) 0
la•
0
cr1 1--11- N-
0 "`.10 0
•
.4
0
0 0 0 0
.1S.
Cli IZQ
Cn g
4 0
,S4
C0
0
't/
Cn1
0
0)
:A ;;\
H
C4 Ha, rC:21‹/01
•
.4
.4-4
8 2
40
75 $.413-1
X)
0
ct Di
0
CD cd
44 Ai
HQ
0 u)
0
0 M "Ci
r-1 -) a)
7.4 52
CD (1)
t-4
$4 vb
o E-4
cH
W
4:)
0
r4
o
o
I
-1-1•
•H
0
.
cv HIH 01
0-.10
0
a a Z
6 2
..*
.
(r)
-P
as <4
-P
H
fat
0.
0
CJ)
1-3 0.1 7:)
0--.....0
0
. . 4
No
-cs
8
H (0 CI)
cv c.—
oa 0 0
0.
cy,
a
$4 0 co
0 0 P4t0
,.0
0-1
0
•H
0 $4
4)
MCD
0,
•
a) rCi
a) 0
0
4./
.4Z 0
"CI
;_, 0
ei-.1 0
0 04 4)
c.) 0 0
o ai H
.
0
0
0 CD
0 o
42
-4-' UN
00
crI
4-) 0
H
0 al
cd
0
0
0
4-)
0
0
4)
a) 4
H
t
4-1 CID 0 M 0
bpocno
.L)o
c•-i 0 c•A 0 E-40 E-4
tt
cdc1 M •1 0 -ri
•-1 CO
v) .2 4a 4-1
El
0
4)4-1 .0 -riV)...04f) 'Crtil 'f14.4-ICO M
a) al • 1-I cd
a) cti •rt cci
p ,..4
ra
;
E: r.7-4
H
H
._H 19.4
rA
-.7.1-.1
cr) r-T1
$.1 0 -P
0
o ca
;•I 0 +2
ANALYSIS OF PHYSICAL INPUTS
Products Used
The amounts of each of the various products used in serving coffee and milk
per 100 guests in the respective restaurants studied are shown in Table 8. The
amounts were determined by weighing the beginning and ending inventories,
accounting for all purchases, and dividing the resulting figure by the number
of guests served (Table 10), Products used by employees, as well as those
used for purposes other than coffee and milk beverages, were deducted from the
total disappearance figures,
Coffee
The total volume of coffee brewed during the study was calculated by
dividing the pounds of coffee used by the amount required to make one pot.
Multiplying this figure by the number of cups obtained per pot yielded the
number of cups of coffee brewed. The amount of coffee used to brew one pot,
as well as the number of cups obtained per pot, was determined in each restaurant by observing the actual practices.
Cream
Since cream was consumed with other items as well as coffee, it was
necessary to make allowances for these other uses. Cream was allocated to tea
at one-half the rate for initial coffee servings. In restaurants A and B an
allowance of one individual creamer was made to every ten coffee refills. In
restaurants C and D the cream was allocated to coffee refills on a pro rata
basis; that is, a refill serving of one-half cup was charged at one-half the
rate of an initial coffee serving. A further allowance of 5% of total cream
consumption for other uses was made in restaurants C and D where the counter
dispensers are used for fruits and cereals.
In all cases the volumes of coffee sales, tea sales, and other uses were
determined from the analysis of the guest checks.
Sugar
In all of the restaurants studied an allowance of 5% was made to other
uses of sugar such as fruits and cereals. The remaining consumption was
allocated to initial coffee servings and tea on an equal basis. Sugar was
allocated to iced teat four times the rate of coffee and tea. Sugar for
refill coffee was allocated on a pro rata basis, as described earlier.
Water and Ice
The water used in preparing coffee was, calculated by multiplying the
ounces of water required per cup of coffee by the number of cups brewed and
converting this figure to cubic feet. Similarly, the water and ice served to
guests was calculated by multiplying the ounces of each required per serving
-16r-4
al
4.)
O
(f)
g
C
-...1 -.1 CN
-IN NCO 0
•-• 1. A CO C•-• ON
• . •
,....4 c-4
010
•
co• 0• n.
•
%-.4
4-)
▪
••4
ON
.4
0
4-)
N
0
0
O
CS)
Crl
-4, r*4
NO
• 0• Es-• NO• •`4•
e.4
0
O di A
4.)
0
ts.
0 C\I CC)
\ 0
• • C.--•
cd
to
(I-'
cd
Na
U)
U)
4.)
(/)
4-)
tO
A)
4)
to
1/N
0 ON
+-I
0
trico
•LA .0 0. c•J
C)s,
• • CO• CC)•
r.1
CV
0 $4
0 V
r.1
(..)
•0•
$41 En
N a)
•
0
• ON
•
en
•••1
•
U)
mri
Cf)
A
A
O a)
ci 4
4-)
0
0
$.4
1.-i
0
v)
ri
4.) g
of-.7M
'.0 NO\CO *O
$4
CPn CO CO C4-- 4.71
• . . . •
rd
•••1 v-♦
C1.1
N
O
O
go
co
(4
4)
(1,
4-4
t4-4
0 ai
(.)
4-)
$.4
0 ea
--„1 co 0. c•J 0
14-4
$4
r-• cv• co• co. ino
0
N
<4
E--1
+.-1 r-I
CV
4.)
to
•n-•
N
(4
N
CC) CD CO
•
•
•
•-•1
al
c:3)
O IA
co 4)
1.4 0
a) A
4-)
0)
4
0 0
•••4
••4
a) a)
s4
to
U
0.) P, •
"4
CH ••1
4-)
U
O
$1
C14
• • •
V) v.) u)
. I 4 . I : 4 A
+.4 n-.4 1.-1
4-)
••-I
O
0
• 4-> 4
43 at 4)
•
+)
1*-1 •
• u)
O .C1
0 •-4
• ▪ CV 4)
O 9 8-)
4-) H
00
>
0)
U) 0) S-1
O 10 0
4)
9
0
0)
0)
C+4
4-1
o
L)
•
Co
6
(1,
40
...
r•4
14
.....\ II
01
.„1:41
.
C4
t(11 I
0.4 0)
41)1 g Si4 r'l
0) c+4 0) 01 4) 0)
V) 0 44 0 (CI u
0
r...) 0 u)
H
0) N
Q .`"..4
O
.44
$-4N\ I
....t 0)
0 •••I 4) 0)
to .1.4 (d u
0
I'M =
•
C.4
itS
4-) 1-1
•
g
•
44-4
O 00
el
H
0 q)
•
M
I-1 H >
2
..1‹1
4
m
—16a
o
co
re\
aJ
c-4 t cv co ..zt
\O r- ON cv
IA
c'•-•
r*"-
0
4-1
c"")
a)
U)
Cd
cd
-P
cr)
CD
cd
co pi
43
ON
ut
'cr‘
•
•0
CV
M
rs- \•0
trvu-N 1st
twit
•
•
03 0 co cv 03 co 00 H
co n0 03 H —100 00
CO I-I
0 ON GO
H
0
H
I-1
-P
0
al
C0 lal
4-)
%.0
LA
n0
CV
•
aN ri
co 0 CO 0,4 r4
0 r4...
r-i co \.0 0
0 crN 0,1
cel C\I
r-I r-i rq
H
'40
c--
H
0
0)
(1)
W
0
00
cd c4
-P
ti)
a)
c-.•
H
0
1J\
cd
•
reN vC) I"- H H 00 H
• Ocvers,Ht.-
Crl
CO
c--H
M..'
("NI
H
tn-•`.0 N
4-4 H
H
4-1
C4
qd
(1)
H
0)
H CO 40
p•
$4
•rl H 0$
H
ca
ct) . 1-1 r-1 10
-4-'
Q)
4 •ri 110
- 4a) p., 0
'0 a)
u) 1,.
0 0
P4 FA 1.4 $.1 co ,r-1
0 a, a)
'1".1 O. h0
1) cf) 04 P 41 $4 a) $..,
14-1 H
0)
"Cl
a)
0)
9:,
0) 1 4
$-1
u)
0
a)
a) k
4
H co a) 4-4 (i) (1) W U) W
a)
4-4al r--I 0
$.1
04
ci)
H
.r4 r-4 0 0 0 4-4 ,0 CO
+3 o
+3 • ri r-I 0 r-1 0
W 03
•H 4-4 0 0
• 0) t:• r-I 4-1 04 W 0
•r4 $.40 0 0 0 ^3
0 0 40 o
W I,
••
0
*
4.
4-4
p.,
c.)
(I)
0)
V)
4-I 4-4 00
ta)
tz•
0
ri
4-4 r-i
t-4 CO 0 10 41 0 •
* 01.) -43 r-i +z +5 -0 ha
o al
•
01
co
ai
01
rg)
.4c-ti
11-4
H
0
1
** *
fi-400000clo1),,1-1(
U
i. i ,,,,,
4-1
'04 -ta E.' 1> E-1 E-4 Ec -z4
0
2
'0
1-1
.1;
..,,:-.1
-17to guests by the number of coffee or milk consumers served and converting
this data to cubic feet and pounds respectively.
Milk
The volume of fluid milk consumed in each restaurant was calculated by
multiplying the number of glasses sold by the average size of the serving
in ounces. The number of glasses served was obtained from the guest checks,
while the average serving size was determined by weighing a series of servings
and averaging the weights. An inventory of the total milk used in each
restaurant was maintained to determine the percentage of the total milk used
that was sold as fluid milk.
Since fluid milk sales are not subject to the same type of refill servings
as is true of coffee, any milk refills recorded during the study were considered as initial servings.
Labor
Labor data in this study, with the exception of washing and bussing
dishes, were collected through a work-sampling technique. The daily restaurant'loperations were divided into time periods with the relatively busy lunch
and dinner hours separated from the lighter business hours in the mornings,
afternoons, and evenings. Observations then were made during each of these
periods on different days of the week. This made it possible to cover a
sufficient number of conditions so that all potentially significant sources
of variation were taken into account.
During each observation period the observer selected one or two waitresses and at intervals of 15 seconds recorded the exact tasks being performed by each waitress. An accurate count of pots of coffee brewed, as
well as all servings of coffee, milk, and water, was maintained during each
observation period.
The labor time required for washing and bussing dishes in restaurants
A, B, and C was determined by totaling the working hours of those employees
engaged in this operation. Time spent in other tasks by these employees was
then subtracted from the total to obtain the hours spent in washing and bussing
dishes.
In restaurant D the task of washing and bussing dishes was not assigned
to specific employees. Here, the bussing labor was measured by the worksampling technique. The washing labor was measured by performing a series of
observations to determine the average time to prepare, load, and unload a tray
of dishes. The average time per tray multiplied by the number of trays washed
yielded the total time spent in this operation.
The unit labor requirement necessary to perform the various operations
connected with the preparation and serving of coffee and milk are shown in
Table 9. The tasks included in each labor element are reported in detail
in the appendix.
Cv
X18»
J N 0 Q -^ tT -4 tf\
t \ CV 1n (V\ -zI• t(1
m to ?I '00-4 ON 1 f^
• O r - O O r" d \0 CV t`-
r-1
+-f
.-+
\()
tl ' +
N
(Y
..^
CV '
(I)
0)
cu
O
.0
O
.-^
t r
'0r J
r , ^,
to U
.-I
i
r--f N c
CO w1 0\ -4
In
o to ^
d
U)
O
Sc
-1-)
0
CA r"t N tX^
o-.0
CM r .4 .-1 N C'- lh M VG
+f
tr1
C1f
r'
t!1
CV O
0
i0
CO
-3
o
(A
tr1
.--f
U
O
.-f
F-f
(11
N
-I
.--f
CTS
C-- QC o - O s-I CV tt1
^
^ C CV '.0 t-
O^
NCO ' o N:
'00'0s-4 1J\ 4,-I
-N:
4
of
0
0
t^.
'ti
M .-i M Lr\ o'
^O tt \O
i
c' 1
cz? ^O ^fl t ^1 Cam- Cv r
(AJ tr1N 4toN r
N-
1nNCO ^tAOO (^V}! ^M
e-f
O
lV
^^•++ N
" W
U
4
N
.^y
V1
•.-t
0
O
41
U)
.^
M.
°
02
4
'L7
0
p1
., r
*d
-4
'E
p,
+.>
p,
N
p1
t1i
N pOi
'
O O
N
t
O
4
Cd
u
0 *tl ! COI 0 E+
+^ M
(v O1 C
lU lU
N
ctS
«a N
rti S f
c
rti
C ^c7
0 !-^ «+
0
^., to
lU 07 (ti
W W".L",
V} O O Cr) E-i H
^w N U) O O u) E-+ H ?
H
- fl
f-i
4-f of
tta
-19Allocatin Joint Labor Costs for Cleanup,
Servin • Water Taki Orders and Pre rin
Checks and
e Time
Only those portions of the total restaurant labor time that were allocated
to coffee or milk are included in Table 9, Direct labor time for coffee and
milk are readily evident. A brief explanation is necessary to further clarify
the method of allocating joint costs such as cleanup, serving water, taking
orders and preparing checks, and idle time.
By multiplying the total waitress time during the study by the percentage
of observed time devoted to the element in question, the total time devoted
to each element was ascertained. Total element time, of course, applied to
all items sold in the restaurant. Consequently it was necessary to allocate
a portion of the total element time to guests having coffee or milk and in
turn to the respective beverages.
The number of guests served coffee and milk, both ala carte and with
dinners, is shown in Table 10. Also, the amount of the average check (ala
carte, with dinners, and weighted average) is indicated for each type of guest
order. The value of coffee or milk relative to the average guest check is
shown in percentage figures along with the percentage of guests ordering the
respective beverages. These two sets of percentage figures were used in
allocating the total waitress time to coffee and milk. The time allocated to
each beverage was shown earlier in Table 9.
For example, in restaurant B it was determined that 19.32 hours were
devoted to cleanup operations during the study. In this case 55.50% of the
guests had ordered coffee, so a proportionate share of the cleanup time was
allocated to these guests (19.32 hours times 55.5o% equals 10.72 hours). The
average value of the guest check of guests ordering coffee in restaurant B was
80 cents. Coffee therefore equalled 12.57% of the average check (10 cents
divided by 80 cents). Consequently, 12.57% of the cleanup time, or 80.6
minutes, was allocated to coffee.
Similarly, 9.68% of the guests in restaurant Bordered milk, so 9.68% of
the cleanup time was charged to these guests. In turn, milk represented 9.76%
of the average check of these guests, so 9.76% of the time charged to these
guests was allocated to milk.
It will be noted that there was considerable variation among restaurants
in the relationship of coffee or milk to the average guest check. Thus, the
cleanup time allocated to each beverage varied because of the actual differences
observed and because of the allocation procedure. The amounts of labor allocated
to each beverage for the other joint services varied for the same reasons.
Washing and Fussing Dishes
/1
An actual count was made of all dishes washed during the study period,--
Data on numbers and kinds of dishes washed also served as a check on data
gathered by other techniques.
-201
V)
.1-)
$-1 g
g
V
cd
-I(/)
-)
t'"' ON
00 -1
.4 Cs-
on <V
UN • ‘40 •
•n
\CC -0- CV)V.
0
1"
ON 0
0 •
.. 1-4
"4 409'
.-I
-4 0
00 tA
ts.-- •
C.) .-I -4
•
ON 1"
1"
CV
0:1 474).
c0
•
liN •
1.1) cO
\O
ON rel CV 00
0 tr•A 4--- •-.4
r•Nt • cV •
-.A.
+..-9-
.-4
t'-')-
01
cm
(-el
c0
oo
• n.0 •
CO
--.1
4,9..69-
CV
--.1" CO
-.0' •
412-3
ON CM
.4
•
CV
1-4•
11\ 4,9-
tr\
'.0 -4 re\ -.1'
CV ----i C--- CV
cv • U •
.
1" .-I
.-I CO
re.i •
co _../
cc, -4
CO •
en
c.1 .--1 '-0 V;;) ON UN CO
01 tr \ co
--I 1" •0 \O
•
,..1 ---1"
4:A
4P,
44
$4
0
.0 (34
co •-.4 .0 0
••-i Ls- .--4
CO • 1." .4•
r •-f
ON
-1 •
V)
0)
•--1 444
on 0
0 CO
0 •
..
i-,
0 CI
-P
0
0)
14
cd
4)
0
0)
.-4 N1." e-4
'.0
•-i 404
0
‘40
••
I-4
ON ---/• cy c0
•
04‘0
• IA
CV r^.4
VCO
-I--(79-
..,:).
-0-
CI \
cv
r--
cv
CV
0
4,--- '.0 cv t.o V) '0 (N)
it\
r--0
0 .- tr.% 0 rfl
r..I
•
•
+t).
-V+
0
r...-.
ON
111 -4
c").
tr,
-1
•-I
_..1
NcV
c0
4-4
4-)
•
CV
%-4
1."
)PI
4* 1-1 '<A
tA.
r-I
-EA
ve4
-EA
•
0-1
+A
CG
4.)
(S)
i4
V
al <:
4-)
0
CV 1" 0 ‘0
CO --7 3.-4CV•
.0 •
CZ' .69-
•••;s 474
00 0
Cry •-4
cv •
1-4
to+
CO .-4
V-- .4
VI •
.,
•-i -c.49.
0 (11 Os. ...I. r-4 ON \-0
t"• CO
4,-.1 00
• CeN
,4 MD
• ---.1 MD•
..-1
-1-
CO
•
1-4
cv
til‘
4.y.
4./9.
.E-9-
CV
CC•
nC)
Cv
4-4
r".1
0
0
-4)
0
'0
0
0) 0
01 .6)
0
co
0)
r-1
0
r-t
+.1
.1-1
•.9
0•.:4,1
p.4
0A)
n)
0
1
f/)
0)
4)
tn
.--4
0
6)
Cd
▪
g
vl
0
(d
0
t-t ,4 r.i
0 _4
0
0
fa)
vi
o)
(d
(a, u
.0
t.) 0
o)
.0
U
0) 6)
V)
.-4
$4 0)
U
0)
6)
6)
V)
(.4 ,C
0
f.4
0)
fa, A
14
..t
.4)
4-1
‘f-i
U ..t
In
1-4
4-I
V
(9 0
O
(4-4
4-1
V
.
H0
...I
0)
0
0
)
R.
O 0 0 n) 0 N4-1 0 0,
4-)
0 -+) ••L4 0 0$ -4 V
0 QV 00
00
e-i .--4 .-4 En
c...4
U w...1
,.4 0
V)
CH CO
rai
%-.4
oa .-I
0
no 0 ••4 0 4)
•-.4 0
$4 0
(ti .0
4‘.4 4)
(d o) 0
44-4 > 4-) >
v)
0).
>, 4.4 >
0 0 4-4 > 4J > 0 > v)•••4 0
I-4
E .6 0
0 CA 0
El 0)
(.4
O
0
r,
.-t 0)
.W 0 .-5 44 ...
-4 0 .4
$4 0
$4 V
0
-4) al
0
4.) 0>
t4 I.) 4.) (,)
0 0)
0)
ai 0)
0 •0 0)
CO 0) 0 0)
0) 0)
IV
4-4 4 0
4-4 4 0 A .0 0 .0 S
A .0 (d ,g
.0
et) --I
U ...f V 0
0 0
4-)i4
-0 $.4
C.) .-I U 4-4 0
9
0
0
,․)
0)
17)
0) 0
0) 4-)
0
4-> ' ),
0>
0 0 4-) 0) 4-) >
0 0)
0 a) 0
0) i-I al
0)
0) 0 14-4 0 (d
0) CH 0) 4•4 0) 0 .4 0 0
0 0
,-4 (d
0 0
ea •-4 0
0 (1.4 0
.-4 0 n) 0
0 0 •--i 0
&I
IN
u 0 0(4-i
0
$.4
al 5.4
5)0
r3 1.4 A $4
• 0
• 0)
&4irj-I '."' ti) 04
4-) 0
(-4 0 i-4 0 .4) o
0 4-) 0
2
> V
dZ
E-4 4::4
0
c
4
>
H d
(9 (1)
MI
a.
0 > 0> 0> 0) 0)
‹C 04 04
E. <4 M4 *t4
I
gt.
6)
$4
0
A
4-)
oi
g
..-1
v)
0
•4
to u
0 14
0) 0
0 0,
si
n) 0
> 4-)
ct) v)
($)
21 g
P i..,
•n-• o
V) .s.,
....
"I RI
-21The labor time involved in washing and bussing dishes was allocated to the
respective beverages on the basis of the number of pieces that coffee and milk
sales contributed to the total number washed. A summary of the number and
type of dishes washed during the three-day study is shown in Table 11. Also,
the percentage of pieces that each beverage contributed to the total is indicated at the bottom of the table. Pieces used by employees were deducted in
determining these percentages.
As silverware was handled with greater ease and efficiency than the other
pieces washed, it was accounted for by treating it at a ratio of 2 to 1 in
allocating the labor costs; that is, two pieces of silverware were said to be
the equal of one other piece.
Restaurant B serves as an example of the procedure used in the allocation
of dish-washing labor to coffee and milk. During the study coffee sales to
guests accounted for 3,259 of the pieces washed. Dividing this figure by the
total number of pieces washed (14,662, after dividing the silverware by 2)
yielded the percentage of pieces contributed by coffee, or 22.23 percent.
Similarly, milk sales contributed 193 pieces or 1.32% of the total number
washed. Multiplying the total labor cost of washing and bussing dishes by
percentages found for the respective beverages yielded the portion to be
charged to each beverage.
Equipment
Depreciation and Maintenance
Depreciation and maintenance expenses were computed for the various kinds
of equipment used in serving coffee or milk by the restaurant operators. The
data relating to the dish-washing equipment and installation were obtained from
equipment distributors and contractors, as restaurant owners generally were
unable to supply original equipment and installation cost data. Data for
coffee makers and milk dispensers were obtained from the restaurant operators.
Depreciation costs were calculated by depreciating the equipment over a tenyear period and prorating these costs to the three-day study. In a similar
manner, the annual maintenance expenses were prorated to the study.
In lieu of depreciation and maintenance charges, the rental charge for the
coffee-making equipment in restaurants A, B, and D was determined by multiplying the pounds of coffee used by the reported rental rates. Rental charges on
milk dispensers could not be accurately ascertained, so are incorporated in the
product cost of the beverage.
As with labor, total costs for dish-washing equipment were allocated to
both coffee and milk on the basis of the number of pieces that each beverage
contributed to the total number washed. However, the efficiency in the
handling of silverware relative to other pieces was more pronounced with equipment costs than was true for labor costs. It was observed that the equipment
handled an average of ten times as much silverware per washing cycle than was
possible with other pieces washed. In allocating equipment costs the silverware
was treated at a ratio of 10 to 1; that is, ten pieces of silverware were said
to equal one other piece. The various other types of dishes were counted as
one piece in each case.
r-i
tr.oCt CC) ••0
0-1 O'.0 0'1 C..- ',Or r-1
0
MN 000 Cr's
\O CV 0\
H
00 N- n0
H
w
0\
CO
O
CO
N-
cd
0
-P
0
cd
Cd
4-)
02
/
1.11
pi
H
ON 0\ .....1' N- 0 01
MN \Q CV H
If\ 1.1-\ *-0 ."
r-i en
1./N
ON
N-
Cd
H
4.)
U)
'0
O
0
r:
-0
co
O
at 0
00-r
ta
0)
0
LO
N.
*ri
g
1
4-'
0
O H
i
r-cv
On
00
cv
H
0
•r4
C-ti
:
UN C*-- O' 0 00 VD VD
4-4 1.r% 'LA C.-- Cs- in rn
H
1-1 H H 0\ -41
r-i
H H CV 0.- CV
H
t•-•-..1' NN- 0\ 0
cp cd 0 \C) cf% H -1-
+3
ONH0 H
O•
C0
CV
a)
• U1•
•
.P
•W 0 0
HNo
•A •C)
04
40 4-i 0
0 4)
9.9
rm.'
'tg
0
CO I
0 a)
s
U] ' -"D
O
.4 e•
to n-0
El .4-)
cd
04:0
-I-)
U)
0
r.........i 0 0 ......1. c0 cNa reN (NJ
ON
\O --1H4.-1 C*4 Cv -0' H 0 O\ V\
cv cfl (NI eg' k 0 HM CO CV CV H en CO Cs-- cY\
H
H
re% rrN cv ON crl 'u'n H 0 Q va r--
...,,i c-- ak r-- ,-.4
0.1 0 .-4 Nu c‘iV\
1.11111 H c0 VD
0..1 0 ON 0 c•41
H r--1
CV
CV rt) V \ 00 ...'
CetCV
re)
CV
.
•
c\I
cn
H
C\I
ON
H
CV
•0
0
0 44 0 4)
*7-3 cd
4-) '00
a.)
0
+)
V)
cd
0 u) 04
0 r4 E 0
C) •
0 +)
0 0
o
0) V) 4.1 '0
W 0 0
-P
0H
H OD .0 in
P
co
Cv
•
00
4:14
1
co
cNi
r'r
-4.4-1
0
C\ I
4-4 N'
a)
'0
a) 1.4
;-4
1
4) 44 4
- 0
o
4 4.4 4-4
-t +aH
,
44
CV
CO
.H
0
"0 "0 ca 0
."-...
0 0 0
0 '0 0
'0 •
10
4 4
0 CO
0
'd
4)
0 CO
f,4 to a)
i.-4W
0 g)
mt a)
.0 rrN1 0 .
0
0 0
1-I
0
.0
(4)",--.1 $
0 44
0
4-4
-0
4
(4
co 4.,
ua
• co
0 03
1:4 $.4 0
CA W
U3 0) 0
00
.0
q
a)
0
H
a)
0
'0
a)
0
4-1
-r1
0
0) 0
0). .0 0
0 a) 0
0 a)
4-4
0)
0) .0
0 ri CO 4)
0
.r-I I>
4) +1 "C$
-.4
.0 0 0 Co 0 cd • -I •H 0 'rI 04 i.1
•1- ► 0, 0
O '0 0) 0) 0) 03 4)
CO '0 E-4
04
0
C24
u) co cu co co
-4-1
44
Ca
44
CI 4
UO 0
0 01
$4
44
0
4-4
00
H 0 0 ci 0) .0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0
0
0
r-I
CIO
F-4
0
.0
4
4)
0
43
04
4 40
0 0 0 -P -P
S.4 01 4-I
f-4 0 ,.W
4)
SA E 0 04 0 0
0) 0 44
0)
(c13 r..A
0 0 .... 0 0 4i co
,0 0 0
C)4 0 H .0 04-4 0 4-.4 r-I
$4
0
$4 E
0 0 4-4 -4 -) S.1 0 0)- 0
0
0 cia Z 0 0 0 E-4 .441 ..4
P-.4
.QI
t+.1
42 0 .cd
P-4 0 0
0
4-1
Fi4)
•
'PO
0 v0
W
t,.4
0 C
to
4) (V +-I '0
.4
a)
0) -1.3 t .0
02
.ate
+) ,0
0
a) 0 V
•
U2 0 • nnn
0 a) "0 0
H
.r4
w
4) H 0
1-1 4:4
0
47--,41J n1
-2 3Costs associated with equipment directly related to either beverage,
such as coffee makers or milk dispensers, also were allocated on the basis of
equipment utilization. Three of the restaurants studied obtained hot water
for making tea from the coffee-brewing equipment, In cases such as this,
the percentage of equipment cost charged to each beverage was determined by
the analysis of the guest checks. For example, the analysis of guest checks
in restaurant A indicated that tea represented 5% of the combined sales of tea
and coffee. Therefore, 5% of the costs associated with the coffee-brewing
equipment were charged to tea * Similarly, the percentage of costs associated
with milk dispensers actually charged fluid milk sales was determined by the
percentage these sales represented of the total volume of milk used during
the study.
Water, Gas, and Electricity
The physical amounts of water, gas, and electricity used in each of the
restaurants are shown in Table 12. The volume of water used in restaurant C
was computed from direct observations of the washing operation. In the other
restaurants the volume was computed from manufacturers , specifications for
the particular equipment employed. The volume of gas necessary to heat the
calculated volumes of water to the temperatures observed during the study
was determined by applying the appropriate formulas provided by gas distributors. Electrical requirements were measured by means of meters attached
to each piece of equipment used during the study.
The cost of water, gas, and electricity used was allocated to the
respective beverages in the same manner as the equipment, maintenance, and
depreciation costs,
Serving Equipment
In restaurant A it was possible to determine the actual annual breakage
rate from inventory records. In the other restaurants records were not
available and breakage rates were estimated by the operators. Annual costs
were prorated to the three-day period. The portion of this breakage cost
actually allocated to each beverage was based upon the percentage of total
use of each item that applied to the respective beverages. The percentage
of utilization was determined from the analysis of the guest checks. Thus,
if 10% of the saucers used during the study were in connection with foods
and beverages other than coffee, 10% of the cost was allocated to these
uses.
Supplies
The physical volumes of washing compounds and disinfectants used in each
of the restaurants were measured by maintaining inventory controls during the
study period. The costs for these items were allocated to each beverage in
the same manner as the dish-washing equipment discussed earlier; that is,
on the basis of number of pieces washed.
The preliminary survey of restaurant operators indicated that the normal
disappearance of napkins was approximately one per guest served. In many
at
S..
7
07
ni
.0 r--- t*--01 04 c%)
\0
tr. 4U)-)
,....1-
ON
Ntr\
• • •
• • --rU1en
re\ .--, ,4 ON try
.--1 .0 •--I
CV
'0
CN
0
-7
l'n
0>
9 co 0
(1-1
0
+)
C.:)
C
L.-IA
(1)
-4-1
$.4
C•.-
(..)
CN!,
CV
Nr r-I
CO
Cam-
().
r-I
r-4
90 t)
4
a.
•
0
en
N11\ *LIN
\0 C \
-1 CV
0
r-i
tR
4-)
CZ
0 C,- 0
Isl, C\I ...I
<4
s--I
CO
•
Crl
CV
f•-•
CO
r-i
CI\ to -.1" 9 CO CO
-1. r.ri O\ CO if \ O\
Cr
1**- MI
r.,./
rl
to
4-)
C)
°r.
(9 0
00
0
4.)
4.)
U
4-1 CI)
..*•4 %..4
g 0)
S-i 7 ,..01)
4
VI
n–CO.4
al
4
000
X 0 ea
g 0.4-1
*•
1-4 0 0 4.4
0 .4.4 .4.4
4-) Q Q
al
---
0
U
43 In
r.I
03
0
1-1
0
0
t--
4
4
VT
aS
A
to
•* or4
m(i) CI
0
(/)
ri
w
1.4
‘4 14)
••-i
0
$4 a) 0
0
g
0
g
•-• $.4 7 A 61 0i) 0
>1 0)e.
4.) 4 r. -1 4 1 v)
..,
...I til al
U it tn (1) (9 '0
1-1 2 a 4..1) 44 ...4
$4
ti) 0 4-4 col r-i
00 ,n,1
...4 0 0 •,-4
0
CI
0 Li 0
,4
N
"Ct
e
6.
0 4
0,)
4-)
rq
<1..C\41
-25cases, the guest having a small ale carte order did not use any napkin. This
observation was offset to a large extent by the fact that many coffee consumers
use two napkins; one to absorb coffee spilled into the saucer, and one for
their personal use. For the purpose of this study, napkins were allocated at
a rate of one per guest served. The allocation of napkin costs to the respective beverages was based upon the relative value of the beverage in the
average guest check of guests ordering coffee or milk.
-26-
Ct
0 01
u)
g
a% 0 -a)
r-I
Pk
Oi
Dint
8
U) H
o
N
4.4 14
0
b.0 0 43
a$
CD
fl
Ga
o
$4
M RI
+).t.I6CO
8
co +) co
4.)
4n, 0 4.3
*I-.
m 43
V
0 71 4 RI g .o,
c.) .) w0 $ 'CI
4
0
0
1-1
I:*
43
.1.4
g
4.3
o
H
a)
0 OLD r-1
42
.5 8 '
+3 o .5
0)
43
rn
w
St
0
•ri
a) c.) A r-I
o
1,8
0
0
H
erN ,.0 c.) H r^i
bit 4) 5
iii
i-i
0
0 i t "S fi
:,
0
0
ii
cda,
0
0
0
k
0 k
rd
CO
0
as
CD
k
in
Fi
0
9-I
,4,-
t6
4-I0 ..
a
(41,9
0 1
cti 0 1-4
;I 44 0 0 gi
cti
...-1 0
1 i t Li .9 a
do
N
coil q?) :0
cd IA 1---1 r-1
H
.27.
Appendix Table 2, Composition of Labor Elements
Element
Com osition
Making coffee
Measuring coffee into receptacle for brewing and
attaching receptacle to brewing equipment
Removing and disposing of coffee grounds
Rinsing receptacles and strainers
Filling coffee bottom with water in restaurant D
Serving coffee
Assembling (combining cup, saucer, spoon and
creamer), filling and serving coffee to guest
Transporting coffee pot to guests for refills and
serving guests
Other coffee labor
Rinsing coffee bottom
Cleaning coffee equipment
Serving additional cream to guests
Filling cream dispensers and coffee dispensers
from stocks
Serving milk or water
Picking up glass, filling and serving to guest
Transporting pitcher and serving additional water
Other milk labor
Cleaning milk dispensing equipment
Changing dispensing can when empty
Taking orders and preparing checks
Recording orders
Computing charges
Cash register operations in restaurants C and D
Cleanup
Removing used dishes and transporting to bussing
station
Wiping counter and tables
Cleaning equipment not related to coffee or milk
-280
0 0 10
H+CI
CD
,....
cet
IS\
lc\
0
•
Atet•
(1.)
t3D U)
1 1 .r.`"71
U)
43
F---1 5
°
1.11-.../.
.,00000
•9•* I
te=
-5
04
o g
o
0
0k
-1-3 4-4
04
C7-1
ON
CV
0-e,
(NI cri
IA 0 0 0
0000
0000
•
• • •
ON
CV 0 0 CnI
a) A
---1'
0
0•
fr \
I-4
0a
430W
0
+4
4.)
as
4.3
.r.1
e.)
r)
CD
.1-1 0 .ri
k
r4 8 +9 - si
0
0
4,A
0
of
$.1
g
0
bo
+,
g 43-ri g0 .rq
.H 0 a) 0
.0 . 1-4 0 •r-{
0 0 a) k
40 al 0 4-3 -1-3k
gkg00
0 I P. +4 0 4.3
0 -g 0 0 ri 0 3
fago)AZA
+4
•ri
0 A
04
cnI
fd
84
:g
CA
4.1
U)
44
0
o
k
uU) li
+)
0
0 1>
k
0 0 a)
b.0
•
1..t\
.--4
C.cn
H
0
0
a
'IA
+
'0
Ha)
S-4
0 a)k
CD()
o
0
r-I
0
a)
1-1
0 co
a)
4.3 44
40 co t- n40 co ‘0
ti 1 g s'N 2.rd
o o
,e 0
og
ot
A
00
000
fa, • • • a a
•rt 49,
g
0 0 *
0.0
-ri 0 43
g 4.) g
•ri
•H aS a) 0
.0 +4 M •r1
k
0 0
a) 44
R.
r
••ri
or
er.t
CO
ON
("NI
g
0
a
•
0
rr, 0 ot col
8
8
8
• • • •
0• 00
0
a
A
0
4\1 I -.1*
0\I
0•
81
• g
0• 0•
40.
0
3
4-3
O•
..41
Ce1,
0
P4
ceN 1.:\ 0
cm
c. cv
to„
0
888
•
40 • • • 01
co
0
UN
to 0 0 k
as 0 43 43 s.4
g
k 1 0 a)
0 I p, 0 4.3 M
0 .0 0 r-i 0 0
glia3AZA0
43
.0 .414
Cxi
c-- r-- -1
0
§ El
0•80
• •0•
S8
001 : M CO
CN1 1 " (1,1 1.11
.
0
,. , ‘J• 00
<I •0 • <1
*
..---..
(0
,--,
t
0
0
M
• PI
43 g 0 kli
g14
(9
4
8
-8-1 -rt 0
U) -P
0 43g - 1-1
a) •rt
00 +4
43 Nr--* +3
0
0 .14 0 ‘g
1 .0 0
0
0
(II
•ri g •r1
0 .1-1
*A
k •r1
k +I
0 Ill k
9 °C) 4-,
.4
0) 4,3 4-) k
0 +3
Pi
-1-3
11 4? og
CI)
0 Si g 0 O) 4)U)0
0 0 (0 0 0 0 0 14:301 1
0 Mori 0 43
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0
094 fig e),
0. (0 0 r-1 0
,.$ rr1 4-1 0r4 eri H
gr.i 4-4 •-“A 44 C7.3
1114:1ZA
8 A
•ti
1:4C.)
0
1-4
1--1
r-I
C
• .76
14 03 +3
a) *rt
g ,,-, ..-.
aQ
-29.
O
U)
4-) 0)
U)
$4 0) 5.4
ea V 0)
a. 0) (0
•0
C•I
r
c0
CO
•0
0
It \
4,9
0 0
tcs,
I
r-I
•
s
i
co
-I-)
a)
0
0)
-4. ---1 ON V \ ---1
0
1
..
4-) .-4
I
1
0 ›.., (9
ve
U
0)
EL,
ert
...zr
I
I
I
r-I
0)
-4.)
C-- 1.1 \ -.IC7N 0 tr \ \ 0
000 c''
0000
. • • •
I
CV In 0 rfl CV
0 0 0 01
00001
O• • • •
04
..-1
C.
o
q-4
er
it)
(I)
0)
I ..-1 (..)
4-) r"
I4 al @
0) *1-4 g
1
I
i
I
cy •..I ..4 0
4 C) C4 0)
4..) VI 0) 4.) 4-) I-4
I.4 L.) 0 0)
g P. es) ...4 4-) u)
0 4 1:9 r-4 0 0 0
p•tnfOrAlzo
.4 0 0
4.) to ea 4-) tr
gais-Igt)
pi -. 4-) Cf)
0
Fin
li CP') 41. 48
". .
I
t
I
1
”.4 ••4
214 °
ts.)
g:64
LI
s
e
s
I
V.,
1..C1
n
co
-.1
c.)
ON
V.-
0
• .4
-09
•-1
--1* 0 co 1-4
tr to•-• 1-4
(NI 0 0 0
0• 0
01
•
. 0
. •
c0
4.1
0• 0•
A I
4.)
8•
re•
\ 1/
Fl
• >1
14 V) 4.)
0 01 ••4
0
W
-'7,-;
4-)
(fa
C.'
0)
P•
v.)
••4
0
•
•,-4
1,4
+.)
••-1
U
1:$
CO
r-1
;,
ri')
••4
MI
•
•0 CO
CV re \
f1 II
"' rC‘a
IA
0 .0 1
0•
'-'• C.I
•
-(09-
I
CO 0 C\I
%.0
e-e cc)
0 07
•
•
•
IrN
•-I
0 0 0
V- 4..4 0.-1
Cr%
......
V)
$-1 >
0) 4-)
0 ••••
M
CV
I t;
I (9
I °4
el
If \
CM
u
$4 Id 0 CO
•n-n •••• 0
i 1.,
% 4 u
4 u c4 o)
4-1
3
4.)
0) c)
0 v) c)
td sr U 0
IV as
0 co
P. 0 M4-) ta
0)
4-; as *-4
44 •-4
0 4 ea •-4 0 co 0
K.0
ii-I .-I W4-1 al
P.v)C14-1=
o
o
,, ...
(..)
o
elil
ul
0 *IA
0
0
r-11
g
O ›., 0)
+) $4
•C)
ri
CO CO
ON 1.1\
0• 0•
-0 0) (S) +
0
t.4
O• CO Cr% e0
1-4 GO C•I CO Cr%
crl 0 0 0 c0
0 •CD• 0 •CD•
CD
•
4.) .1,4 0
I
•0 I tr\
V.-
V..-
r.-1
•0
re)
tr\
0
• .
•
-.ft
5,4 4.) 0
I.
0
0 0
1
••4 4-1 0
••••
I-. MI•U t'II
tr)
14
0)
U
0 ITS
0S 0 4-) 1
(/) ...1
Ul
04 1
.......0
0t:4 I
s4 .4
0 0 r-I
M
4-1 0:1)
of 1.1 4s
o
(.4 p.,
o) 4) E--•
(z)
1
o
..)
I
0
0 0
.1,4 0
$4 +) g
(1) ..-0 0
0
0 0) >5
0) 4.) § ••-•
0
4 as
...I
M ‘4,4
‘4 •/-I 0 +9
0 .0 4) $4
(9 4.) 4.)
4-) tn. CY 4-) $4
0( de-4 0 ea
41) ;4 0 0
a) 0...4 0)
0. ••-• 4.) v)
0)
t+-4 o) ( t e "-a
0 4 0 10 al al
gionog:aeo 4-1p:4w
„,.., ...4
o
0
VI
t-L1
4 0 o)
•
0
0 CO
H
CO Po
$.4 0 €4
Q) 0
0.4 OD to
IA co \O
L`•••• Cs-- CO
0\
0H
0 0 0
• •o
CO
0
mH
f44
+4) .g
0
0 0
0) •H .C) -P
H
-P
4) 0 S 0
.
ry
0
4-1
O
M 44 0
cd 0 (1)
•r-I
• Fc
4.3 +1
N 0 0
R4 'el 4)
..S4
cd r—I
HA is41
04
z
0
0 Ca 15
"0
—.1'
r--1 -P 4)
03 4":.
F-1 0 f-i
0 0_ 0
CI. mu cn
H
H
z
U)
P 0% ---1. ON LA 4.1'
0CDC\1000•0
00 —..1' 0 V\ —1'
U)
0
00
w
0
ga, •
0
0 0
.H 0 -I-3
40
0
-P
0 4 r-I
•r-I 0 0 0
..0
• r-I 0 . 4-1
0 0 0 S-t
+3 Ct CD +3 -P $4
a)
0
cr
rx.1
• 0 0
'5 '
o4
F.4.0C) a)
a) 1 Cs, •r1 a) +) to
0 .0 0 0 H 41 cri
1:14 caP.II=1C.,D
vi -r-I
0A
CP
rra
1
Os H
0 0 0• 0 0 0
0a)
4-4
4.4
00
0
r—t
CVOs!
0• H•
a)
tO
N it
k ;>4
f.... m +1(1) +2
a) 4 •-i
1 ° •r1
0 r-1
N
0.1 4 3
4) +3
0
a) 0 a)
4-4 0 r-1
4-Ica 41
C.0. )
0 -r1
Cd •421
N
-P
a) t)
a) 0)
4-c H
eH isl
00